Naval Bombers

Started by eye_SPY, October 24, 2003, 06:16:44 AM

Previous topic - Next topic


Here is a link to my "Red 76" TU22-M2 of the Naval Long Ranger Bomber Regiment out of Riga in 1978.





Hmm... that may be somewhat too large to be landed aboard the carrier.  :blink:

Perhaps, though, with a RATO boost, we might be able to launch it.  ^_^  
In want of hobby space!  The kitchen table is never stable.  Still managing to get some building done.


Comrade Iosef,

How can you be so foolish!  The solution to the problem is plainly simple: We build a bigger carrier!  Do you so doubt the abilities of our patriotic workers?

Or perhaps you need a session of reeducation under the tutelage of Gen.Vespernoliavich...
"We can resolve this over tea and fisticuffs!!!"


I think Comrade Iosef definately needs some reeducation from Gen Vespernoliavich. Our comrade seems to lack the necessary Patriotic Socialist ardour as well as a lack of faith in our glourious workers abilities....Say the word Comrade and I'll have my security section pick him up...

Col Lancerov - GRU..
If you love, love without reservation; If you fight, fight without fear - THAT is the way of the warrior

If you go into battle knowing you will die, then you will live. If you go into battle hoping to live, then you will die


greetings comrades

maby we coudl put this under "long-range-carrier support" aircraft?

i mean considering the range of this aircraft + the addition of a fuel probe, this could have unlimited range!!!!!! this could be launched from land conventionally and be inflight fueled by aircraft from the carrier, so it is a "carrier craft" but one that has a land base to launch from?

Captain Canada

Hey Steve,

Beuty job ! That's such a cool looking a/c, and it looks even better in blue !

I sure hope I get a chance to see that baby fly before it retires.....

I also really liked your buddy jeff's Corsair...wow, what a job !

Cheers !

CANADA KICKS arse !!!!

Long Live the Commonwealth !!!
Vive les Canadiens !
Where's my beer ?




I shocked, truly shocked, that you have called my patriotic fervor into question! Why just the other day I was considering the most recent magnificent 19 hour speech given by Maximum Leader Castro, marveling how the imperialists could possibly not be moved by his eloquence and verbosity. In fact, I cheered that recent decision by the foolish Americanski Imperial Senate and House of Non-representatives to open travel to the worker's paradise of Cuba. They do not suspect that once the US proletariate visit there in large numbers the whole capitalist state will learn the true results of the ongoing Communist Revolution.

However, I must and will speak to the leader of those facilities that are to ship aircraft to load aboard the great triumph of the socialist state, the ultra-carrier Sovietski Soyuz. It seems that while your factories have been producing the aircraft to extend the arm of the Revolutionary Naval Forces, those aircraft have not been sent onward. Only this week did the onboard support vehicles finally arrive, incomplete and unpainted even! I shall investigate this obviously Western-supported conspiracy and have those responsible shot immediately, as well as doubling the vodka ration for the remaining workers to encourage their patriotic fervor.

As for the bomber, our current research only takes us up to 1980, so it is certainly possible that I am yet unaware of a Soviet vessel capable of landing and launching such a magnificent aircraft.

Up da Revolution!
Up Castro!

Comrade Iosef R
In want of hobby space!  The kitchen table is never stable.  Still managing to get some building done.



Whilst thinking on the question of a suitable vessel for launching our glorious long range bombers, I had an idea. Why not covertly buy/ steal a couple of those western supretankers?. They could then be moved to our facilities at Vladivostok and refitted as a bomber carrier / launcher. These floating monsters would certainly be long enough to launch one, landing, however could be a problem, unless the bomber recovered at a land base.

For the Glory of Mother Russia

Col Lancerov - GRU
If you love, love without reservation; If you fight, fight without fear - THAT is the way of the warrior

If you go into battle knowing you will die, then you will live. If you go into battle hoping to live, then you will die


Quotelanding, however could be a problem, unless the bomber recovered at a land base

Do you doubt that our glorious scientits won't be able to find a solution to this problem?  We just have to fit a Soviet hook to slow the monsters down.  

I'm volunteering for the flight test program!

Major Olivienev Jakovitch Lacombski, SPD VVS (Special Projects Division)

Za Stalina!


exellent idea! comrades

however if neccecery the backfire has the range to reach a friendly land base from where ever it it, so we have options people!  :D

oh BTW ive come with an interesting mig-21 kit bash in 1/144 thatl rase a few eyebrows, my OKB with have pics soon.....................



The west is currently toying with the concept of "sea baising"


It is essentially a modified series of mobile oil platforms forming a large flight deck, capable of handling c-17's and C-130's, and tendering naval vessels.


It will be slow and vulnerable, but it can possibly handle a backfire.

Our laborers can build it, there is no doubt, but is it worthwhile?


(Soviet National Anthem plays off phonograph in the background....  Why are you still sitting?!  STAND AND SING ALONG!!!!)


Is GLORIOUS day for posting such wonderful advancement of the GREAT Soviet Union!

Such a naval bomber would strike fear and an instant questioning of one's political beleifs in decadent western naval personnel when they see this.

My design bureau continues to work on elements of the Red Banner Fleet's air arm.  We welcome the contribution from the Tupelov designers, and now must open up our shipbuilding section to build a ship to handle such a grand example of Soviet engineering!

Excellant work, comrade!  Extra bread and vodka for you!

Comrade "Vlad," however, you will report to the nearest reeducation center for questioning whether or not it is worthwhile to build a structure at sea for Tu-26 usage.  The Politburo and Kremlin say it is, so therefore, it is.

Comrade Captain Anatoly Josef Pakizorich, Naval Aviation Bureau

(Soviet National Anthem goes on repeat...)
I exist to pi$$ others off!!!
My categorized models directory on my site.
My site (currently with no model links).
"Build what YOU like, the way YOU want to." - a wise man


Mother Russia has needed warmwater ports to conduct trade with the world, that is why Pytor Veliky fought to secure the Caspian sea and the Crimean peninsula.  Though Mother Russia has always been primarily a land power, the greatest in Europe and the world, she has aspired to become a sea power ever since Pyotr Veliky liberated Ukrania from the tartars and turks in 1696.  A great inland fleet was used to liberate Azov for Mother Russia.  Among Pytor's modernizations and reforms of Russia was the construction and maintenence of a fleet.  Since then Russia has always had a large fleet, but sadly it along with her army rotted under the mismanagement of the Tsars culmination in the humiliation at Tushima and the collapse of the large but ill prepared land army in 1916.

Mother Russia has always been a land power.  If the army is properly trained and equiped, there is no doubt when backed up by her resources and her workers that her armies will emerge victorious.  Of this there is no question.  The question remains will she be victorious against the seagoing imperialists.  The Soviet Union has always been aware of this.  That is why prior to the Great Patriotic War the Soviet Union Embarked on the construction of a seagoing fleet to meet and beat the British, Americans, and Japanese on their own terms (in the ocean).  Because of the fascist attack, this was suspended so that the army could be supplied, and afterwards, the fleet was scrapped before it was finished because it had been rendered obsolete by naval advances during the Second world war.

Under Khruschev, there was no surface fleet so to speak of.  While he accomplished much in missiles, space and submarines, Khruschev ignored the means by which the worlds workers become free: our troops and aircraft doing so.  The Imperalist/Facist Patton stated it was the soldier who forced Germany to the peace table.

These backfire bases will be slow and dificult to position.  Because of this they will be vulnerable, and will have to be armed with S-300 and S-400 Sams to take down missiles aimed at them.  But they must serve as more than backfire bases.  They can tend our fleet, and project the power of our Airboirne forces and Naval infantry whereever they may be stationed.  We will have only a few of these bases, and they will be constructed rather slowly.  They must be positioned carefully so as not to be vulnerable, but to also be usefull in supporting our brother socialists struggles.

Ivan Grozny


Adding Battleship calaber guns to our bases would reduce vulnerability to theatewr misslie attacks.


And if our semi mobile bases cant get there in time, we could have a large fleet oiler serve as a tender to flying boats



again you think so small. What you are missing is the next great step in our glorious revolution. We talk not about landing bombers on carriers, but using bombers as carriers. In fact the British Imperialists once broadcast a show where a giant airship was a flying aircraft carrier. Why, our long range bombers could easly dock with such a facility. And we could easily load it with fighters.

The initial drawings from the Zevezda yards show a craft with a long cylindrical centre section, a forward launching tube centered and slightly below centre of the rounded and streamlined faired bow. Two large spherical thrusters hang below at the stern.

Her proposed name is Maximum Dorksky.  
Getting back into modeling